Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Rosetta's Philae Probe To Land On Comet Tomorrow

Posted by Soulskill on from the best-of-luck dept.

An anonymous reader writes: After more than 10 years travelling, the Rosetta mission will take its next, momentous step by landing the Philae probe on comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko tomorrow. How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! Follow the landing live using the webcast, blog, or Twitter feed. (Keep in mind there's a 28-minute delay due to the time it takes the radio signals to reach Earth). Here's the scheduling info: "For the primary landing scenario, targeting Site J, Rosetta will release Philae at 08:35 GMT/09:35 CET at a distance of 22.5 km from the center of the comet, landing about seven hours later. The one-way signal travel time between Rosetta and Earth on 12 November is 28 minutes 20 seconds, meaning that confirmation of the landing will arrive at Earth ground stations at around 16:00 GMT/17:00 CET. If a decision is made to use the backup Site C, separation will occur at 13:04 GMT/14:04 CET, 12.5 km from the center of the comet. Landing will occur about four hours later, with confirmation on Earth at around 17:30 GMT/18:30 CET. The timings are subject to uncertainties of several minutes."

74 comments

  1. Happy Tuesday from The Golden Girls! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Thank you for being a friend
    Traveled down the road and back again
    Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.

    And if you threw a party
    Invited everyone you knew
    You would see the biggest gift would be from me
    And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.

  2. How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: -1, Troll

    Dunno. I'm an adult, and I pay for my own Internet access, so I can swear without my parent's naughty word filter catching it. How 'bout you?

    1. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by cold+fjord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One of the powers that actual adults have is to be able to not swear and express themselves in other fashions. You up to that?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't find a naughty word that fits with 5 hidden characters. Which one is it? It's one of:

      facetting factoring fallowing faltering famishing farrowing fastening fathering fathoming fatiguing fattening featuring ferreting festering fettering fidgeting filleting filliping filtering finagling financing finessing fingering finishing flambeing flaunting flavoring fledgling flinching flouncing flowering flurrying focussing following fomenting foregoing foresting forgiving forsaking fostering foundling frazzling freckling frighting frizzling funneling furrowing

    3. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Nice vile condescending attitude you have going there jackass.

    4. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the irony eludes you.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    5. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Apparently the anonymous summary author isn't up to it. He's trying to use the profanity without actually saying the word. While I agree with you, cold fjord, as an adult I feel people should use that ability to express themselves and either say the word or not. This pussyfooting* around is silly.

      *Uh-oh! Now I've done it!

    6. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fellating?

    7. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by BrianMarshall · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As a middle-aged adult(ish) geek, I think it is FUCKING cool ! Screwing around in Low-Earth Orbit is one thing. Going out and landing on a comet is awesome. Are you old enough to remember which TV you were glued to during the first manned landing on the moon? This isn't that cool, but it is damn cool nevertheless.

      --
      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" -- HST
    8. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by iggymanz · · Score: 1, Interesting

      One of the powers that actual adults have is to be able to invent new and particularly offense swear words to tweak puritan-types.

    9. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Somehow pretend 'swearing' is more adult?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    10. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by towermac · · Score: 3, Informative

      I want to disagree. I mean yeah, Man on the Moon. In any universe, that is going to be cool. But that appears easy compared to Rosetta.

      10 years to get there, circling through the solar system how many times? Then catching a comet with just about no gravity, and slowing down to pace it. Even 'orbiting' it a few times, which is really just firing your rockets to go in a circle.

      And then landing? The Moon is a freakin' parking lot with stripes compared to that comet. Plus, having an astronaut came in handy when what's his name had to manually land with seconds to go.

      Yes, I remember. But I was a kid, and I guess I figured they did that shit all the time. I didn't appreciate anything. Now, in hindsight, I know different, and appreciate (somewhat) what they did during Apollo. But this seems harder than that, and thus, cooler.

    11. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      One of the powers that actual adults have is to spell rite.

      When you want to say "fucking" it's spelt F U C K I N G.

      Oh, by the way it's an ESA mission.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    12. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I'm enjoying the irony.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    13. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      One of the other powers that actual adults have is the intelligence that one word has no more ability to injure us than any other, and allow people to swear all they like, because it does us no harm.

    14. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      One of the powers that actual adults have is to be able to invent new and particularly offense swear words to tweak puritan-types.

      One of the powers that actual adults have is the ability to communicate in a civilized manner without trying to tweak anyone or thinking they're sticking it to "the man" by attempting to be cool or edgy.

      Unless we're abandoning the whole concept of trying to live in a civilized society except when it comes to the stopping of war which is routinely promulgated on here.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    15. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      I'm curious, in your travels do you ever meet any humans?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    16. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by JasonGoatcher · · Score: 2

      I'll probably be flamed for this, but saying words can't hurt you is utter crap. It's possible to have an attitude that prevents certain comments from hurting you, but that simply means you have no emotional investment in the person using the words.

      Words can, and do, hurt. Sometimes to the point where physical injury would've been a blessing relative to the damage the words caused.

      The Bible says it best. What is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

    17. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently not. Otherwise, he'd know that lots of people are oversensitive.

    18. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Pablew+Nopl · · Score: 1

      I'll probably be flamed for this, but saying words can't hurt you is utter crap.

      Words can't cause physical injury. Offense is also taken, not given. By dwelling over the words of others, you cause intangible emotional damage to yourself. It's seems to be hard for almost everyone to overcome the desire to inflict emotional damage upon oneself, but nonetheless, people should strive to do so, rather than having pity parties.

      But really, this isn't about attacking others, but about certain words arbitrarily being deemed 'bad.' Then, a lot of these people treat these words as if they don't just offend *them*, but that they're magically objectively bad, even if others aren't offended by them. And then, somewhere down the line, the government gets involved because of oversensitive, unprincipled whiners saying that things they don't like should be banned, and we end up with unconstitutional nonsense like FCC censorship.

    19. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      And there is a word for that aren't "oversensitive": sociopaths.

      I see you're practiced at avoiding detection.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    20. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People that aren't offended by certain words society arbitrarily deems bad: Sociopaths. You heard it here, folks. Make sure you're offended by everything cold fjord is offended by, and make sure you like what he likes, and dislike what he dislikes. If you can't manage that, make sure to not say anything that could offend anyone, because then you'll offend our dear PC overlords. If you fail to do this, you're sure to be diagnosed with psychological issues over the Internet.

    21. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Pablew+Nopl · · Score: 2

      Intelligent people also have the ability to act intelligently and get over irrational fears of certain words arbitrarily deemed to be bad. This usually involves questioning society's values. I guess that would make many people who insist that any word they don't like is "uncivilized" (a completely subjective term) rather irrational. Some words are just objectively bad and uncivilized. The magical opinion fairy decided it.

      Unless we're abandoning the whole concept of trying to live in a civilized society except when it comes to the stopping of war which is routinely promulgated on here.

      You know, you've got a point there. If someone says a word that you don't like, they're objectively uncivilized and want all of civilization to come crashing down.

    22. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Ooooh, are you one of those "over sensitive" people? Sure looks like it.

      Why don't you come out into the open. "Bob" right?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    23. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Woosh.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    24. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 1

      The irony that actual adults are expected to not proudly wear vile condescending attitudes and otherwise act like jackasses?

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
    25. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      I know civilizations where it is ok to rape and then "honor kill" one's sister. Definitions of "civilized" vary, I reject yours also.

    26. Re:How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by stjobe · · Score: 1

      "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can really hurt me".

      --
      "Total destruction the only solution" - Bob Marley
  3. Light is too slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And space is too big... aint no one got time to wait 30minutes just for 1 leg of the transmission

    1. Re:Light is too slow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Space is not too big. The speed of light is too slow.

    2. Re:Light is too slow by slew · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Space is not too big. The speed of light is too slow.

      Actually the speed of light is just about perfect for the photon. At the speed of light, time dilation/spatial contraction allows it to be pretty much everywhere on its world line at the same "time". Thus space is certainly not too big for the photon (if you ignore inflation).

      So the problem isn't that space is too big, nor that light is too slow, but how finite beings like us experience time (i.e., life is definitely too short)...

    3. Re:Light is too slow by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Then all we have to do is remove the space between us and the comet, and the signal will get here faster.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Light is too slow by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      And space is too big... aint no one got time to wait 30minutes just for 1 leg of the transmission

      Go invent something faster, Einstein.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Light is too slow by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      I think you can do that with Photoshop.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:Light is too slow by towermac · · Score: 1

      Dang, I already commented, so no mod for you.

      That might be the most profound thing I ever read on /.

  4. 3AU out, unpowered, uncontrolled landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They just got their first of four GO/NOGOs for launch from flight dynamics. Looking good!

    1. Re:3AU out, unpowered, uncontrolled landing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it was a "GO". Looking even better!

  5. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could somebody explain this to me? It's some new meme or something?

    1. Re:What? by tibit · · Score: 2

      It's an annoyingly old pseudomeme :(

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
  6. North Korea's response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hear that the "Dear Leader" in North Korea is concerned that the prestige of North Korea may be slipping due to so many other countries sending probes to the moon, Mars, comets, and many other places while North Korea has so far not been able to join in given the poor showing of their rocket techology. His solution to this is to sends a probe to an easier target, the sun. His scientists commended him on his clever thinking since the gravity well of the sun would help overcome some of the deficiencies in North Korea's rockets. But they were forced to also inform him that although the goal of sending a probe to the sun was doable, they would not be able to match the feats of other nations by actually landing the probe on the sun due to the intense heat. The "Dear Leader" replied he had though of that and told them to simply land at night.

    1. Re:North Korea's response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have been banned from /r/pyongyang.

    2. Re:North Korea's response by Holi · · Score: 1

      and Ireland

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    3. Re:North Korea's response by __aanbvm4272 · · Score: 1

      "Night time? But the gravity would kill any attempt to land> oh fearless leader"

  7. All together by lsllll · · Score: 0

    Leaving on a jet plane, don't know when I'll be back again ...

    --
    Is that a roll of dimes in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
    1. Re:All together by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      shouldn't have booked with malaysia airlines, doofus.

    2. Re:All together by sconeu · · Score: 1

      Thank you, Ben Affleck.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:All together by EETech1 · · Score: 1

      that was funny

  8. How f!@#$%ing cool is that?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe his phone's ducking autocorrect won't let him.

  9. We're landing on a comet by KeensMustard · · Score: 1

    I guess there is no real objective measure of what constitutes the peak of human achievement in space. But this has to be up there with the best of them. Go you good thing!

    1. Re:We're landing on a comet by slew · · Score: 1

      I guess there is no real objective measure of what constitutes the peak of human achievement in space. But this has to be up there with the best of them. Go you good thing!

      I think one of the candidates for the peak of human achievement in space is the Apollo 11 moon landing done on manual. Or perhaps the first space walk by the USSR...

      The comet landing, however, is probably right up there with the other top robotic achievement in space. FWIW, the mars curiosity sky crane one of the other top 10 that comes to mind...

    2. Re:We're landing on a comet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess there is no real objective measure of what constitutes the peak of human achievement in space. But this has to be up there with the best of them. Go you good thing!

      I think one of the candidates for the peak of human achievement in space is the Apollo 11 moon landing done on manual. Or perhaps the first space walk by the USSR...

      The comet landing, however, is probably right up there with the other top robotic achievement in space. FWIW, the mars curiosity sky crane one of the other top 10 that comes to mind...

      I call BS: by your logic Laika was the peak of canine achievement in space. Human achievement is making things possible, including putting a token man in space, but realistically atm. manned space exploration is just as much a nuisance as it is an immediate PR win. Firing a few thrusters and being able to use an airlock is not even the tip of the iceberg of what went into making the feats you mention possible.

    3. Re:We're landing on a comet by slew · · Score: 1

      I call BS on your BS. Nearly all the stuff that made space flight possible were human achievements on the GROUND.

      Most humans in space have been part of nearly ballistic trajectories or computer controlled robots. On many missions, human presence in space was largely for vanity reasons and the missions could have been accomplished with robots. However, there are a few times when humans were key parts of the accomplishment in SPACE which is what I was pointing out. That takes nothing away from other folks fine accomplishments on the GROUND which made it possible.

    4. Re:We're landing on a comet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an artificial and absurd distinction, goes against what the OP obviously said and is only intended to dismiss what ESA is trying to do.

  10. dirty snowball dies tomorrow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the pictures already published from this mission, the dirty snowball theory is demonstrably false. And the double-lobed form means the comet wasn't formed via accretion.

    1. Re:dirty snowball dies tomorrow by trout007 · · Score: 1

      Hoping for a nice electrical discharge are you?

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  11. Electric Universe Preditions by trout007 · · Score: 2

    Let's see if the lander has an electrical anomaly on the way down. Should be interesting.

    https://www.thunderbolts.info/...

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    1. Re:Electric Universe Preditions by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's about as much chance of that happening as you revising your theory when it doesn't match observations: practically none.

      I'm wondering what Talbott and Thornhill have been reading, or perhaps I should say what they have been smoking, because their description of the observations does not match the ESA's. It has lots of water and a dust trail, and while there has been some unexpected magnetic activity, there isn't some electrical bogeyman waiting to jump out at the lander — and it's not like the scientists involved aren't paying attention to such things. Apparently in order to believe in EU not only do you need to ignore a century's worth of physics (including Einstein), you also have to ignore current observations and make up your own. This is beyond intellectually dishonest and far into flat-earth crackpot territory.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    2. Re:Electric Universe Preditions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll eat those words. I'd like to reveal my identity and put my money where my mouth is but I'm not a member of this site.

    3. Re:Electric Universe Preditions by towermac · · Score: 1

      Ah come on man, you're being a little hard on them. Whoever wrote that definitely fancies himself a scientist. That's enough. Zealots often find things. Even when they're wrong, they sometimes discover something, even if it wasn't what they were looking for. But intellectually dishonesty is not true; they believe that shit. and crackpot is just not nice.

      You go, electric universe people! I await your wonderful discoveries, submitted to the appropriate scientific journals, and then disseminated to plebs like myself.

    4. Re:Electric Universe Preditions by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not what they believe that makes them intellectually dishonest, it's denying and inventing observations. Crackpot is not nice but it is accurate.

      I await your wonderful discoveries, submitted to the appropriate scientific journals...

      EU people have a hard time getting published, and never in reputable journals.

      Whoever wrote that definitely fancies himself a scientist. That's enough.

      This contradicts the above, and fancying yourself a scientist is enough for what exactly? Enough to lie to people? No, the important part of being a scientist is not dressing in a lab coat, having a PhD (the EU guys are in no danger of that), or making predictions. The important part is being empirical, testing your predictions in a methodical way, and adapting your theory to match those observations. There is no more value to what Thornhill and Talbott's writings than any other lunatic's ravings. If you want to cheer on pyramid energy, crystal therapy, homeopathy, or the Electric Universe, that is your business, but it has no place in science.

      --
      Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
    5. Re:Electric Universe Preditions by trout007 · · Score: 1

      These aren't my theories I just find some of them interesting. It makes some sense that there should be a charge differential between a region close to the sun and far away. I am actually looking forward to the data.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    6. Re:Electric Universe Preditions by Cigarshaped · · Score: 1

      As if quals had any bearing on a person's integrity Thornhill actually graduated BSc in physics and electronics, and later MSc in astrophysics at Q Mary College, London. When he entered university, he was devastated by the lack of curiosity and even open hostility to what he considered interesting and valid questions. His own experiments had already convinced him the value of investigating electric effects in the cosmos. I think we have evidence above for the considerable number of closed minds within the academically groomed community. With regards to Rosetta vs 67P it is fairly obvious that since the phrase 'if it is a snowball' has never been used in the context, we will see every possible effort to PROVE the snowball theory. More closed minds. Did anyone think of asking "Is there ANY ice on this lump of rock?" Did it really form 4.9billion years ago? Or are we wrong? Is this an opportunity to re-think our glorious Standard Model? ....Is a million years long enough for these so-called scientists to change their precious assumptions?

  12. Check out the math by Beeftopia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Animated gif of the probe's path, from launch to rendezvous.

    1. Re:Check out the math by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that's a nice trick shot!

  13. Electric Universe Preditions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bingo!

  14. imminent death... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the landing will awake the violent aliens sleeping in the core and we all are going to die... ( 28 minutes later )

  15. Disparity in Accuracy by freudigst · · Score: 1

    Wait a second - you're telling me that a probe has been traveling for years on end and will be precisely placed on an object moving several thousands of miles per hour, yet no one knows, even within a rough guesstimate falling within a minute or two, when a signal from the same probe confirming the landing will first arrive?

    Maybe the probe delivery engineers should take over for the communications team...

    1. Re:Disparity in Accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The system goes to automatic once the site is selected, since, it is a little hard to land a craft when you only see the results close to an hour after you send a command.

      So the system itself does a lot of the work, and since it is making a bunch of choices, we don't know exactly when it will be done.

      It's cool, just wait for a bit :)

    2. Re:Disparity in Accuracy by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      Currently the landing will take place at 15:34 UTC, five minutes for landing operations (harpoons, engine firing to prevent rebound), then first photos will be taken and broadcast, with the signal's arrival 28 minutes later. So, 16:02 UTC for telemetry data, 16:07 for first imagery.

      About 20 minutes tolerance for automated decisions/adjustments is allowed, but the tolerance is not expected to be used really.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  16. Changing trajectory and mass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How will this landing impact the trajectory and mass of the asteroid? Will it end up in my backyard ?

  17. GO by vikingpower · · Score: 4, Informative

    Philae has separated from Rosetta, and is now sailing at 18 cm/s toward the comet. One of its rocket engines, on top of Philae, does not work. This engine is intended to push Philae against the comet; we now face the possiblity that Philae gently "bounces back" into space, because of the comet's very low gravity. Tension rising here.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
  18. Semi-live coverage for the bandwidth-impaired by soccerisgod · · Score: 5, Informative

    here

    --
    If a train station is a place where a train stops, what's a workstation?
  19. Webcam sound by kevinpoh · · Score: 1

    The link to the webcast did not have any sound for me, but I found another official one that works: http://rosetta.esa.int/

  20. TOUCHDOWN !! by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    Philae has landed. ESA did it: first landing ever on a comet !! Philae's "tweet"

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace